Christian Couder <christian.couder@xxxxxxxxx> 于2021年5月25日周二 上午4:47写道： > > On Sun, May 23, 2021 at 12:53 PM ZheNing Hu <adlternative@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > My first week blog finished: > > The web version is here: > > https://adlternative.github.io/GSOC-Git-Blog-1/ > > Great! > > See some comments below, but you don't need to update your blog post > for each comment. Some are just remarks that might help you. > > > ----- > > > > ## Week1: Git Adventure Begin > > > > Use Git to submit Git patches to the Git community. > > Does it sound magical? I fell very lucky to be selected > > s/fell/feel/ > > > by the Git community this year and start my Git Adventure > > in GSoC. > > > > I am no stranger to Git usage, and before the start of GSoC, > > I have learned some Git source code content, but I only saw > > the tip of the iceberg of Git source code, there are still many > > things that I need to explore. > > > > ### What happened this week > > - In [[GSoC] Hello > > Git](https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAOLTT8SHE-ok3D+oLNSWFi7KPU==VQnTMDmC4YxUyNBJKmBD8A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/), > > Christian and JiangXin interacted with me. > > - I checked Olga's patch at Christian's prompt and learned a way > > to make `cat-file --batch` use `ref-filter` logic: Use `format_ref_array_item()` > > in `batch_object_write()`, this is indeed a good entry point. But > > before implementing this function, we must make `ref-filter` > > support the function of printing the original data of the object > > (as `cat-file --batch` does). I decided to reuse the atom > > In your blog post it looks like a space is missing after "object" as > we see "object(as". > > > `%(content:raw)` in ref-filter to implement this function. > > The above could be understood as saying that `%(content:raw)` already > exists, which is not really true. Maybe you could say something like > "I decided to add the ":raw" option to the existing `%(content)` atom > in ref-filter.c to implement this function." > > > ### The difficulties I met > > In [[PATCH] [GSOC] ref-filter: add contents:raw > > atom](https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.958.git.1621500593126.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/), > > I submitted a patch, which support atom `%(content:raw)` > > s/support/supports/ > > or > > s/support/adds support for/ > > > for `ref-filter`. > > > > Unfortunately, this patch has a big problem: > > I ignored the breakage on the test. This led me to > > Maybe: s/the breakage on the test/a test breakage/ > Thanks for these grammatical corrections. I will apply them to my blog (very easy) > > discover a bigger problem: > > > > If our references points to a blob or a tree, and these objects may > > be binary files, > > The raw content of a tree indeed contains the binary contents of the > hashes it references, while other objects like commit and tags contain > hashes in the hexadecimal format. > > > this means that we cannot use functions related > > to `strcmp()`,`strlen()` or `strbuf_addstr()`. The possible '\0' will > > cause the output to be truncated. We have to think of a way to make > > `ref-filter` can accept the output of these binary content. > > The strbuf API has functions to deal with binary content. > Yes it is. > > So I searched for all the codes in `ref-filter.c` that buffer might be > > truncated by '\0' and use the appropriate method to replace them. > > > > Just like replacing `strcmp()` with `memcmp()`, We can use `strbuf_add()` > > instead of `strbuf_addstr()`, > > At the same time I also wrote the equivalent `*._quote_buf_with_size()` > > to replace `*._quote_buf()`. > > Nice! > > > I just submit it to the mailing list right now: > > [[GSOC][RFC] ref-filter: add contents:raw atom] > > (https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.959.git.1621763612.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/) > > By the way a better title for your patch might be "[GSOC][RFC] > ref-filter: add ':raw' option to %(contents) atom" > Good suggestion. > > I don’t know if this is the right approach at the moment, let > > us slowly wait for the suggestions of mentors and reviewers... ;-) > > Thanks, > Christian. Thanks. -- ZheNing Hu
